Apple posts "Samsung didn't copy iPad" notice in the UK

In compliance with a U.K. court ruling, Apple has posted their "Samsung didn't copy iPad" notice. At least after a fashion. The notice is rather long, and meticulously crafted by Apple's lawyers. It mentions patents rather than devices in the "apology" up front, and gets its own back in the middle by quoting the judge as saying Samsung isn't as cool, and at the end by citing a German court ruling that did find Samsung violated Apple's design, as well as Apple's massive, billion dollar win over Samsung in U.S courts. And yes, they posted it in Arial.

Since I'm not sure how long it will remain up on apple.com/uk, here's the complete text:

Samsung / Apple UK judgment

On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple’s registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.

In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:

"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."

"The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."

That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal’s judgment is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.

However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.

I was working for Korean companies for over 20 years... bin there many times... they think they are the greatest in everything ...but only, what they are really good in... is: eating dogs and copy-cats ... believe me ...DUDE

I bet Ur real name is Kim... ait.... the racism argument is the most usual answer one get from Koreans if he is criticizes them for what ever reason... they seems to be confused by the meaning of this word... when Koreans call Japanese: ugly monkey, which I heard many times in Korea... that's a racism .. or if I would call U a yellow dog-eating Pig with slashed eyes... nun, that would be a racism too... DUDE

YA... they should put it in all newspapers in the Universe... DUDE... and it supposed to state : SAMSKUNK didn't copy the iPad design close enough... says an UK judge.... due probably to that faulty copy machine, which was indeed its own design!!! : )

I'd actually disagree with your "laymen's terms" comment - the language used is barely of a legal nature for a large portion.

Apple pretty much turned the ruling that they had to post the statement into an advertisement, and I'm amazed that the courts would approve of this. Although no doubt that Apple's lawyers have had a good look through to ensure that it complies with the legal wording that the judge used.

So, they had to post a notice that stated that Samsung didn't copy Apple's iPad when designing the Galaxy Tab and they end the notice with "Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad". Yeah nice try Apple, but I doubt the courts will approve this.

Why is the press insisting on calling this an apology? Apple wasn't told to apologise, it was told to publish an acknowledgement that the UK court had decided that Samsung didn't infringe on the iPad's design...nothing more, nothing less. The press reporting that Apple had to apologise has made it so most people are too lazy to go read and find out that Apple, indeed, didn't have to apologise at all, just acknowledge the judgment handed down by the UK court.

Please, Rene...get rid of the world apology and save us from the lazy rhetoric about an apology that wasn't mandated.

I would not be too surprised if the Judge casts a jaundiced eye at this message, though I am not versed enough in the UK legal system to know if that could or would include sanctions. The last paragraph all but directly states that the UK judge got it wrong, and that these other courts (in Germany and the USA) handled it better. Of course Apple is going to believe this, but judges in any system do not like when a litigant undermines their judgement or authority.

Very well crafted indeed since Apple did not win any patent suits related to the iPad in the US case. This sort of makes it sound like Samsung lost that case against patents and design related to the iPad as well. Personally I find it stupid the judge made this the punishment. It should have been a ruling there was no infringement and be done other than court fees.